On Sep 24, 2005, at 17:05, Manuel Mall wrote:
I just discovered something unusual in the spec. It describes the
dominant-baseline property in a number of places as:
'The "dominant-baseline" property is a compound value with three
It then goes on and lists the 3 components as
"dominant-baseline-identifier", "baseline-table" and "baseline-table
font-size" collectively referred to as a "scaled-baseline-table". Or to
put it differently - the computed value of the "dominant-baseline"
property is a value of type "scaled-baseline-table".
Not exactly. Read 7.13.5:
"The 'dominant-baseline' property is used to determine a
scaled-baseline-table. A scaled-baseline-table is a compound value with
So, it's not the property itself which is a compound value, but rather
the property's enum value is used to determine the compound value of
The current property system models the dominant-baseline property only
as an enum and doesn't provide for its computed value being the above
Any suggestions how to best integrate this into the property system.
Doesn't that mean the getValue on the dominant-baseline property should
not return an enum but a value of type "scaled-baseline-table"?
So, IMHO: No, the property value should be retrieved by getEnum(), and
then the returned value should be used to construct something
corresponding to this scaled-baseline-table, but I think it would be
confusing/misleading to have the property return such a compound value
As to how to integrate this: no clear idea ATM, but I'll give it some
Maybe Finn or others have a few ideas to add?